KARL BOTTS scripsit: > Remember, they have tried basically the same thing at least twice > before: the "POSIX Subsystem" of WinNT, and the "Unix Tools for Windows".
Actually, Microsoft hasn't. The Posix subsystem never did anything useful and was just a cynical hack to satisfy government checklists. Must support Posix -- check. But most limits were set as low as they could go. OpenNT/Interix/WSU was a third-party product, and was an entirely separate implementation of Posix, not quite matching any existing OS. I ported a large proprietary Linux C++ program to it as a proof of concept, and there were a lot of issues but it did eventually work. The intention here is to match the Linux kernel, at least up to a point (and nobody knows what that point is). > I could be wrong. I'll give it a year or two to settle, and then give it a > try. I just hope it does not interfere too much with my Cygwin setup, which I > expect to keep for the foreseeable future. It definitely doesn't affect Cygwin in any way. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan co...@ccil.org "Your honour puts yourself to much trouble correcting my English and doubtless the final letter will be much better literature; but it will go from me Mukherji to him Bannerji, and he Bannerji will understand it a great deal better as I Mukherji write it than as your honour corrects it." --19th-century Indian civil servant to his British superior -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
